I'm not into organized religion at all. For me there is a big difference between those who awakened and the religions created around them. — TheMadMan

I see. How did you come to be awakened?

You test it through rationality, insight and experience. — TheMadMan

Seems unlikely to work. How do we test that people share the same sense of rationality, insight and experience? We can find people who attest to the work of Joseph Smith and Baháʼu'lláh, with equal dedication, sincerity, reasoning, experience. Or Mohammad and Guru Nanak, or... And then there's the issue of how these prophets are interpreted. How do we ascertain what understanding is reasonable and makes use of the right insight and experiences?

Never said I was.

Never said I was. — TheMadMan

Right, but it takes one to know one.

All paths of the mountain have the same destination. If you inquire both Smith and Buddha the destination would not be the same.

Right, but it takes one to know one. — frank

Fair enough. I will not say that I have gnosis of them but only intuition and the extent of my current understanding.

. I will not say that I have gnosis of them but only intuition and the extent of my current understanding. — TheMadMan

I see. :smile:

It is childish to put Smith and Buddha on the same category. — TheMadMan

I agree.

Hence

Religions do not agree but their prophets do. — TheMadMan

is problematic.

Are you saying that prophets ( and I don't mean every so-called prophet) agreeing is problematic?

If you believe in a deity, the language of God is slowly and painstakingly emerging from quantum theory. Archaic priests and prophets are being replaced by theoretical physicists.

Worshiping takes on a whole new dimension.

What? — TheMadMan

The message of biblical prophets. Their god can do no wrong, so if something is wrong, it must be down to the sinners. The god listens to prayers, so if you suffer unjustly, it must be because the petitioner's faith failed a test.
Other kinds of prophet may have had different messages - but then the "underlying truth" is obscure.

I suppose the problem is my use of the word prophet. It is used very broadly.
I personally would disregard most so-called prophet. But that's just my take on them.

This is the situation we should expect if God does not really exist: different civilizations making up different stories about God. But it’s also the situation we should expect if God wants to be discovered fresh, by each person: religion gets us started on the path, but eventually we realize it’s fictional. At that point, we arrive at a fork in the road: atheism lies on one side, a personal search for genuine knowledge and experience of God lies on the other. — Art48

Hmm. So, the situation we should expect if God does not exist is, also, the situation we should expect if God does exist? He would have to exist, I suppose, if he "wants to be discovered." Odd how the failure of religion to convince us God exists somehow establishes that he not only exists, but wants us to believe he does.

Religions do not agree but their prophets do. — TheMadMan

Many people wonder what happens after death.
If prophets agree about what happens after death, please enlighten us as to what they agree on.
(You can't do it.)

Are you saying that prophets ( and I don't mean every so-called prophet) agreeing is problematic? — TheMadMan

This is a very slow conversation.

No, I'm saying that they do not say the same thing.

and I don't mean every so-called prophet — TheMadMan

Ah, only the True Scots prophets?

atheism lies on one side, a personal search for genuine knowledge and experience of God lies on the other. — Art48

Would a genuine search exclude atheism from the very beginning?

Or better, why is the fork here constructed as between atheism and a personal god with wants and needs? What about agnosticism, pantheism, animism, paganism and so on? It's more like, on comming out from under the guidance of mummy and daddy, one beholds a vast open vista rather than a fork in the road.

I personally would disregard most so-called prophet. But that's just my take on them. — TheMadMan

I solve that problem by disregarding all of them, without fear or favour.

Or better, why is the fork here constructed as between atheism and a personal god with wants and needs? What about agnosticism, pantheism, animism, paganism and so on? It's more like, on comming out from under the guidance of mummy and daddy, one beholds a vast open vista rather than a fork in the road. — Banno

That's a good point. Maybe if it is a fork, it's one with multiple prongs - a veritable junction of possibilities rather than a banal bifurcation....

:up:

All paths of the mountain have the same destination. — TheMadMan

All religions canonize the same superstition.

The idea is that there is a reality that deserves to be called "God" and the human civilizations have made several childish, erroneous attempts to describe that reality. — Art48

This is certainly more plausible. But again, I wll have to ask "What reality?"
It looks like we have here another assumption, taking as given that there is such a reality. Yet, this has never been proven to be true. At best, one can consider it as something logical. Which means, probable. But not a fact.

There's of course the case of the Higgs boson which somethimes is called "God particle". I don't know though if it qualifies for what people have in mind when they think about "God". :smile:

Many people wonder what happens after death.
If prophets agree about what happens after death, please enlighten us as to what they agree on.
(You can't do it.) — Art48

You ask me to show you something and then you say "(You can't do it.)".
I'll not bother arguing with someone who has completely made up their mind.

Sure you can disregard all of them, its up to you. But you are not solving any problem by doing that.

All religions canonize the same superstition. — 180 Proof

I'm not talking about religions.

Many people wonder what happens after death.
If prophets agree about what happens after death, please enlighten us as to what they agree on.
(You can't do it.) — Art48
You ask me to show you something and then you say "(You can't do it.)".
I'll not bother arguing with someone who has completely made up their mind. — TheMadMan

Why not do it for the benefit of others who will read your post?
You can't do it because "prophets" disagree, about what happens after death and other things.

I've seen the idea that all religions (if followed far enough) eventually lead to the same place (God) because at some point, the person begins to follow God, not the religion. This is the "personal search for genuine knowledge and experience of God" referenced in the original post.

In this sense, it can be said that all religions ultimately agree, or ultimately lead to the same place.
But that's quite different than saying all prophets agree.

Another view, would be all "genuine" prophets experience the same Reality, but they express their experience differently, and so sometimes may disagree. However, "genuine" makes this statement tautological.

Those poor ancients. They just didn't understand the lights in the sky or why fire, flood, pestilence and almost every creature outside the caves that made really scary growl and hssssss noises in the night, seemed to want to kill them. :scream: Inventing some superhero protectors seems logical but for such notions to still be flourishing now is rather embarrassing, for the human race.
Carl Sagan in his book 'The Dragons of Eden,' wrote that babies instinctively react to sounds such as 'shhhhhhh' and 'psssssssssssst,' and can become quiet, as these sounds were used by early humans to warn their fellows that danger was nearby!

Another view, would be all "genuine" prophets experience the same Reality, but they express their experience differently, and so sometimes may disagree. — Art48

But why do you call it disagreement when they experience the same reality? Their agreement is beyond the words and that's what agreement is. I always surprised how much people cling to words.

You had originally written "Religions do not agree but their prophets do."
I took that to mean that the sayings and/or writings of prophets agree with each other, which I don't believe.

But if you mean they experience the same reality, that's a different issue.
So, maybe you and I can agree that all "genuine" prophets experience the same Reality, but they express their experience differently, and so sometimes may disagree.

Those poor ancients. — universeness

There is some distinction between 'ancient civilizations' and 'tribal cultures', and again between 'prehistoric humans' and 'transitional hominids'. They were never so simple and ignorant as the standard depiction.
As to babies, the instinct to obey their species "quiet!" command goes way back before humans. Quail chicks huddle down in silence while their mother distracts a predator; fawns know to do the same; feral kittens, as soon as they can walk, scatter and hide under something on their mother's command - two weeks later, they do it on their own, when they identify a potential danger.
Natural phenomena, weather, hazards to health and safety didn't suddenly materialize in the world with the advent of H sapiens. We evolved in this world, surrounded by these dangers, adapted over 3 billion years to coping with them.

Sure you can disregard all of them, its up to you. But you are not solving any problem by doing that. — TheMadMan

I didn't have a problem to solve - at least, no problem in my life has ever involved prophets or prophecy.

In this sense, it can be said that all religions ultimately agree, or ultimately lead to the same place. — Art48

I have yet to see this demonstrated. What is that "place" the back-tracker finds? The source of all religion? I have heard "God" - with a big G, as if it were a name - touted as the fount of supernatural belief, but all the early religions I know of had multiple deities and otherworldly beings. The only common - only common, not universal - threads I'm aware of are origin stories, hero quest and redemption stories and stories about the loss of innocence. Before that, there may have been a uniquely human sentiments of loss, wishful thinking, awe and wonder that come with the big brain, but that's untraceable, as it predates rock art.

So, maybe you and I can agree that all "genuine" prophets experience the same Reality, but they express their experience differently, and so sometimes may disagree. — Art48

Then, how can you know what reality - or even Reality, though I don't understand the need for a capital - they experience.... assuming you can identify genuine prophets in the first place.

But if you mean they experience the same reality, — Art48

Ofc that's what I mean.
It is silly saying that they agree merely verbally.
Clear example Buddha says no-god, Jesus says God.
Buddha says no self, Hinduism says Atman.

When it comes to the ultimate one should attend to the implicit.

What makes a prophet, if not his words?
We are all prophets, then, partaking of the same reality, describing it each in a different way.
The most genuine prophets don't communicate ta all: they have pure, direct, inexplicable experience.